Disable Smilies in This Post. Show Signature: include your profile signature. Only registered users may have signatures.

*If HTML and/or UBB Code are enabled, this means you can use HTML and/or UBB Code in your message.

If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

T O P I C R E V I E W

Robert Pearlman

Dwayne Day writes for The Space Review about a top secret spy satellite that was pressed into emergency service to help save the crippled NASA Skylab space station 40 years ago. The mission was a success, and a closely guarded secret, until a retired Air Force general decided to brag.

Major General David Bradburn, who was then the head of the Office of Special Projects, one of the NRO’s component offices and based in Los Angeles, quickly proposed that a GAMBIT-3 spacecraft, also known as the KH-8, readying for launch on May 16, be used to take a photograph of Skylab to assist NASA in planning a repair mission. The manned Skylab 2 mission, which had now become a repair mission, was scheduled to launch on May 25. That short turnaround time meant that the first phase of the GAMBIT’s photographic mission would have to be cut short in order to return the photos earlier so they could be used for planning the repair mission.

According to Bradburn, who spoke about the incident during an Air Force history symposium in 1995, he made the argument that Skylab was an American project and it was in the best interests of the nation that it not fail. This justified using an intelligence satellite to help save it, even if that undermined some of the intelligence collection. Bradburn’s proposal was approved by his superiors in the NRO and, presumably, by the Director of Central Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense.

Ronpur

Amazing, I wish we could see that photo when it gets declassified.

Headshot

Very interesting.

I remember reading, in late May of 1973, a very brief comment that a cutting edge U.S. imaging asset was used to photograph the Skylab workshop before Conrad and his crew were launched. This was "confirmed" to me as I listened to Conrad describe the damaged workshop. He seemed excited, but not at all surprised by the extent of the damage.

I recall reading that the thin strap holding the solar panel wing to the workshop was visible in the images and that the asset used was ground-based.

Perhaps my memory is faulty, or there was more than one type of asset used to save Skylab.

I sure wish that I could find that darn article.

Jim Behling

The strap would not have been visible in any ground or space based photography. It wasn't even visible to the crew until they were fairly close.

moorouge

I can confirm that 'hi-tech' assets used to image Skylab were reported at the time, though the details were not elaborated upon in the reports that appeared in the press. An intelligent guess would have led one to realise that this had to be satellite based.

onesmallstep

If only some of those advanced 'assets' were used before Columbia's fatal reentry in 2003, things might have turned out very differently. A tragedy and a shame.

Dwight

Page 152 of "Brassey's Air Power: Aircraft Weapons Systems and Technology Series Volume 10 - Military Space" ISBN 0-08-037347-X contains a photo made by the Air force Maui Optical Station 1.6 metre telescope operated by Avco Research Laboratory' a ground based telescope. This was the only imaging I found in hundreds of documents I have read in researching my Skylab project. While more than one method may have been used to image Skylab, is it not also possible that those involved have hazy memories?

Robert Pearlman

quote:Originally posted by Dwight:While more than one method may have been used to image Skylab, is it not also possible that those involved have hazy memories?

The Space Review's article includes mention of the ground based telescope imagery as a separate asset.

Dwight

That, then, makes this revelation all the more interesting. The Maui photo shows the failed solar array clearly not deployed, though it is very grainy. I wonder how the satellite image looks in comparison.

Jim Behling

The Maui photo was taken after the EVA to fix the remaining array. The array is in the deployed position in the photo.

Blackarrow

On 20th May, 1973, the London "Sunday Times" (referring to the status of Skylab's main solar arrays) reported:

"Some pictures taken with the Defence Department's secret camera may show the state of the booms, but NASA refuses to reveal what they show."

A week later, the 28th May edition of "Time" made no mention of any "secret" pictures in a long report on Skylab's troubled launch.

Headshot

Although this is not the article to which I refer earlier in this thread, a side box in the May 21, 1973 issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology offers the following:

>USAF tracking cameras in New Mexico successfully photographed the crippled Skylab workshop after it was placed in orbit. The photos were being used in conjunction with the planning of emergency repair operations by NASA.

USAF refused to permit NASA to release the photographs on the grounds that it would reveal the U.S. capability to photograph objects in Earth orbit.